American election campaign turns into a horror show spectacle

The text is part of the Opinions project, which presents the diverse views of commentators and public opinion leaders on key social and political issues.

For Trump and his supporters — especially the most fanatical ones — the last four years of Biden's presidency were a horror. Harris's victory, for them, means America will descend even further into a nightmare. Conversely, for Democratic voters, the scenario of Trump's second term resembles a horror film.

Both candidates attempted to mobilize their supporters by appealing to these fears, trying to portray themselves as the ones who could not only eliminate these sources of fear but also restore hope in America. Despite this, fear-based, deeply negative tones dominated the campaign on both sides.

Undoubtedly, Sunday's Trump rally at Madison Square Garden in New York encapsulated these tones, an event viewed as the symbolic closure of the Republican campaign.

Media coverage of the event was dominated by the performance of right-wing comedian from Texas, Tony Hinchcliffe, who during his stand-up routine called Puerto Rico "an island of trash drifting in the middle of the ocean." The comedian's "joke" sparked widespread outrage in the United States, especially among Americans of Puerto Rican descent—a group capable of deciding election battles in several key districts for Republican control over the future Congress and in Pennsylvania, a state crucial for this year's presidential elections.

Hinchcliffe was not the only speaker at MSG using similar rhetoric and drawing on racist stereotypes. Tucker Carlson, former star of Fox News, mocked Kamala Harris, calling her a "Samoan-Malaysian former prosecutor from California with a low IQ." David Rem, a former Republican congressional candidate introduced as "a childhood friend of Trump," brandished a cross on stage, calling the Democratic candidate "the antichrist."

Trump also struck truly apocalyptic tones on Sunday in New York. "We are an occupied country today," he warned, presenting a vision of America overtaken by dangerous illegal migrant groups.

"Kamala brought illegal migrants from prisons, psychiatric hospitals, and asylums from around the world, from Venezuela to the Congo. […] She settled them among American communities, where they pose a threat to innocent American citizens," Trump asserted, further claiming that "the murderous prison gang from Venezuela" is already terrorizing the city of Aurora in Colorado and will soon take control of New York’s Times Square.

Trump frequently used similar rhetoric during his campaign, as in a televised debate with Kamala Harris where he claimed that Haitian immigrants "were eating dogs and cats" in Springfield, Ohio. The media repeatedly pointed out that such statements were simply untrue or, at best, based on misrepresentations and half-truths.

However, none of this harmed the Republican candidate. His supporters, in principle, do not trust the media, and rhetoric like this—though it might not correspond with their empirical experiences—caters to their deep emotional needs.

After the MSG rally, many commentators speculated whether Trump and the speakers preceding him had exaggerated with their aggressive rhetoric and whether the event in New York had cost the Republican his victory. However, these considerations were overshadowed by an exceptionally unfortunate statement by President Biden, who declared that the real trash is not Puerto Ricans, but Trump's voters.

The topic quickly shifted away from the racist language of the Republican rally in New York to the disdain allegedly harboured by Democrats for people voting for their political opponents. Trump skillfully capitalized on Biden's slip-up, arriving at a campaign event in Wisconsin, one of the key states in this year's presidential race, in a garbage truck, wearing a sanitation worker's vest. The images quickly spread across all media, along with Trump's message.

In some sense, what happened to the discussion around the MSG rally was characteristic of this campaign. It unfolded at a remarkable pace, as if the entire American public suffered from attention deficit and couldn’t focus on any topic for long. Events that were supposed to determine the election outcome quickly became yesterday’s news.

This was the case with the failed assassination attempt on Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania. Images of Trump surrounded by Secret Service agents attempting to lead him out of the line of fire, raising a clenched fist in a combative gesture, were supposed to decide the election outcome. Meanwhile, Joe Biden withdrew from the race, Harris's campaign quickly rallied the Democratic Party around her, briefly injecting enthusiasm into its base. Meanwhile, the public largely forgot about the Butler incident.

This radical shortening of the news cycle is connected with the visibly declining role of traditional media in these elections. While Biden's campaign was sunk by a failed presidential debate with Trump—a traditional television format dating back to the 1960s—candidates later sought other means to connect with supporters outside of TV. For example, they turned to popular YouTubers and podcasters, reaching audiences who rarely use traditional informational media.

For Trump's campaign, his three-hour appearance on Joe Rogan's podcast was more significant than any interview the president could have done for a major TV network. The episode featuring Trump has over 31.5 million views on YouTube as of Thursday, October 31st, and that number is likely to increase before the campaign ends.

Traditional media, similar to 2016, still struggle to cope with the alternative information reality that Trump creates around himself. A symbolic example of their helplessness is "The Washington Post," whose editorial board prepared a statement supporting Harris's candidacy (in the United States, unlike in Poland, major media outlets typically openly declare their support for a particular candidate in elections). However, publication was held back by the newspaper's owner, Jeff Bezos, one of the wealthiest individuals in the world.

According to media reports, the reason was fear of Amazon losing lucrative government contracts if Trump were to win. In response, many readers canceled their subscriptions to the newspaper, displeased that a publication that stood up to Nixon and exposed the Watergate scandal is now retreating before Trump.

The enthusiasm sparked among the Democratic base by replacing Biden with Kamala Harris quickly faded. Today, there’s no trace of it among the Democratic active members, and even less so in the polls. Democratic strategists could still hope in the summer that the vice-president's campaign would ignite similar energy to Obama’s first campaign in 2008.

At that time, the party’s electorate was electrified by the prospect of making a historic choice of the first Black president in U.S. history, contributing to historical change and, in some sense, atoning for the historical sins of American slavery, segregation, and racial discrimination. However, the prospect of electing the first biracial woman did not have a similar effect.

Harris's campaign in recent months rested on two main pillars. The first was the fear of Trump's second term. Democrats consistently tried to highlight how extreme Trump’s program for a second term was, reminding voters that the former president is a legally convicted criminal and a person who for moral reasons should not even be considered for the country's highest offices. In the final stretch of the campaign, comparisons of Trump to the Nazis and Hitler even appeared.

Democrats have a lot of justification for their warnings. Trump has done much to be considered morally unfit for the highest state functions. Many of his proposals—promises of revenge against opponents, using the military to "restore order" in Democrat-run cities, or mass deportations of migrants—rightly raise concerns.

A second term for Trump—if he wins—will be a significant test for American institutions. It will show how effective they will be in stopping the authoritarian tendencies of the head of state. Even if Trump does not dismantle American liberal democracy in a manner like Orbán, admired by Trumpists, did in Hungary, he will make it more authoritarian, unpredictable, and brutal. Certainly, just like in the first term, he will govern in the interest of his class, billionaires and millionaires, offering them favorable tax cuts, deregulation, and access to government funds in exchange for political loyalty. Support from billionaires like Musk doesn’t come for free, and the American middle class will likely pay for it.

On the other hand, as polls show, scaring people about Trump—no matter how substantively accurate it might be—works to a limited extent. Democrats are aware of this, hence the second pillar of Harris’s campaign, which is the attempt to present her as a competent politician. A politician who, unlike Trump, who talks about immigrants eating dogs, is aware of the problems of ordinary Americans and knows how to address them.

This approach has proven to be partially effective. In recent polls, Harris is starting to be seen as more competent than Trump in economic matters—with the economy being one of the most important issues in these elections, alongside abortion, which also favours the Democratic candidate.

However, Harris did not articulate a captivating, forward-looking vision for America under her leadership during these elections. This partly results from her character, as she has always favoured gradual problem-solving over grand visions. Yet, it's challenging to understand why Democrats have been unable to leverage the economic achievements of the Biden administration during the campaign. There is much to showcase, as Biden initiated an ambitious industrial policy, creating opportunities also for Americans without a college degree.

Harris has gathered a very broad coalition in these elections, stretching from Republicans disappointed with Trump—like Bush Jr.’s vice president Dick Cheney or former Republican California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger—to the left wing of the Democratic Party led by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Bernie Sanders. The question is how strong this wide coalition will prove to be and whether its individual members will mobilize to the extent necessary for a Democratic victory.

Polls indicate that Democrats may have issues mobilizing several voter groups they need to win. Trump—despite his sometimes even racist language—is performing surprisingly well among young Black and Latino men.

In the Arab-American community—an essential group for the outcome in key states like Michigan this election—Harris, according to polls, has support 18 percentage points lower than Biden had in 2020. The reason is, of course, the Biden administration's policy towards the war in Gaza. It also discourages part of the American left, especially the youngest generation, from voting for Harris.

Whoever wins will take power in a deeply divided country. "What divided us—it won’t come together again"—these words from a poem by Jarosław Marek Rymkiewicz "To Jarosław Kaczyński" also describe American reality. There seems to be little chance today that a Harris presidency would bring unity, let alone a second Trump presidency.

On the Wednesday following the election, Halloween will be long over, but half of Americans will wake up in a reality they perceive as a horror.